INTRODUCTION: Sentinel lymph node dissection is widely used in the staging of endometrial cancer. Variation in surgical techniques potentially impacts diagnostic accuracy and oncologic outcomes, and poses barriers to the comparison of outcomes across institutions or clinical trial sites. Standardization of surgical technique and surgical quality assessment tools are critical to the conduct of clinical trials. By identifying mandatory and prohibited steps of sentinel lymph node (SLN) dissection in endometrial cancer, the purpose of this study was to develop and validate a competency assessment tool for use in surgical quality assurance. METHODS: A Delphi methodology was applied, included 35 expert gynecological oncology surgeons from 16 countries. Interviews identified key steps and tasks which were rated mandatory, optional, or prohibited using questionnaires. Using the surgical steps for which consensus was achieved, a competency assessment tool was developed and subjected to assessments of validity and reliability. RESULTS: Seventy percent consensus agreement standardized the specific mandatory, optional, and prohibited steps of SLN dissection for endometrial cancer and informed the development of a competency assessment tool. Consensus agreement identified 21 mandatory and three prohibited steps to complete a SLN dissection. The competency assessment tool was used to rate surgical quality in three preselected videos, demonstrating clear separation in the rating of the skill level displayed with mean skills summary scores differing significantly between the three videos (F score=89.4; P<0.001). Internal consistency of the items was high (Cronbach α=0.88). CONCLUSION: Specific mandatory and prohibited steps of SLN dissection in endometrial cancer have been identified and validated based on consensus among a large number of international experts. A competency assessment tool is now available and can be used for surgeon selection in clinical trials and for ongoing, prospective quality assurance in routine clinical care.

• MeSH
• Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy methods   standards   MeSH
• Delphi Technique MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Gynecology methods   MeSH
• Clinical Competence MeSH
• Consensus MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures methods   MeSH
• Endometrial Neoplasms surgery   MeSH
• Surveys and Questionnaires MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH

BACKGROUND: Systematic pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy has been widely used in the surgical treatment of patients with advanced ovarian cancer, although supporting evidence from randomized clinical trials has been limited. METHODS: We intraoperatively randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IIB through IV) who had undergone macroscopically complete resection and had normal lymph nodes both before and during surgery to either undergo or not undergo lymphadenectomy. All centers had to qualify with regard to surgical skills before participation in the trial. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 647 patients underwent randomization from December 2008 through January 2012, were assigned to undergo lymphadenectomy (323 patients) or not undergo lymphadenectomy (324), and were included in the analysis. Among patients who underwent lymphadenectomy, the median number of removed nodes was 57 (35 pelvic and 22 paraaortic nodes). The median overall survival was 69.2 months in the no-lymphadenectomy group and 65.5 months in the lymphadenectomy group (hazard ratio for death in the lymphadenectomy group, 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.34; P = 0.65), and median progression-free survival was 25.5 months in both groups (hazard ratio for progression or death in the lymphadenectomy group, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.34; P = 0.29). Serious postoperative complications occurred more frequently in the lymphadenectomy group (e.g., incidence of repeat laparotomy, 12.4% vs. 6.5% [P = 0.01]; mortality within 60 days after surgery, 3.1% vs. 0.9% [P = 0.049]). CONCLUSIONS: Systematic pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy in patients with advanced ovarian cancer who had undergone intraabdominal macroscopically complete resection and had normal lymph nodes both before and during surgery was not associated with longer overall or progression-free survival than no lymphadenectomy and was associated with a higher incidence of postoperative complications. (Funded by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and the Austrian Science Fund; LION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00712218.).

• MeSH
• CA-125 Antigen blood   MeSH
• Operative Time MeSH
• Progression-Free Survival MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Kaplan-Meier Estimate MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Lymph Node Excision * adverse effects   MeSH
• Lymphatic Metastasis MeSH
• Survival Rate MeSH
• Young Adult MeSH
• Ovarian Neoplasms pathology   surgery   MeSH
• Postoperative Complications MeSH
• Proportional Hazards Models MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Treatment Failure MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Young Adult MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
• Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH

BACKGROUND: Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are thought to be an ideal surrogate marker to monitor disease progression in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We investigated the prediction of treatment response in CTCs of MBC patients on the basis of the expression of 46 genes. METHODS: From 45 MBC patients and 20 healthy donors (HD), 2 × 5 mL of blood was collected at the time of disease progression (TP0) and at 2 consecutive clinical staging time points (TP1 and TP2) to proceed with the AdnaTest EMT-2/StemCellSelectTM (QIAGEN). Patients were grouped into (a) responder (R) and non-responder (NR) at TP1 and (b) overall responder (OR) and overall non-responder (ONR) at TP2. A 46-gene PCR assay was used for preamplification and high-throughput gene expression profiling. Data were analyzed by use of GenEx (MultiD) and SAS. RESULTS: The CTC positivity was defined by the four-gene signature (EPCAM, KRT19, MUC1, ERBB2 positivity). Fourteen genes were identified as significantly differentially expressed between CTC+ and CTC- patients (KRT19, FLT1, EGFR, EPCAM, GZMM, PGR, CD24, KIT, PLAU, ALDH1A1, CTSD, MKI67, TWIST1, and ERBB2). KRT19 was highly expressed in CTC+ patients and ADAM17 in the NR at TP1. A significant differential expression of 4 genes (KRT19, EPCAM, CDH1, and SCGB2A2) was observed between OR and ONR when stratifying the samples into CTC+ or CTC-. CONCLUSIONS: ADAM17 could be a key marker in distinguishing R from NR, and KRT19 was powerful in identifying CTCs.

• MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Biomarkers, Tumor genetics   MeSH
• Neoplastic Cells, Circulating metabolism   pathology   MeSH
• Breast Neoplasms blood   diagnosis   genetics   therapy   MeSH
• Prognosis MeSH
• ADAM17 Protein genetics   MeSH
• Breast pathology   MeSH
• Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic MeSH
• Transcriptome * MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH

INTRODUCTION: Advanced minimal access surgical training is an important component of training in gynecological oncology (GO). Europe-wide data on this topic are lacking. We present data on availability and trainee experience of advanced laparoscopic surgical (ALS) and robotic surgical (RS) training in GO across Europe. METHOD: A prospective web-based anonymized survey of European GO trainees was sent to the European Network of Young Gynaecological Oncologists members/trainees. It included sociodemographic information and specific questions pertaining to training experience or satisfaction in laparoscopic and robotic surgery. χ2 test was used for evaluating categorical variables and Mann-Whitney/Kruskal-Wallis (nonparametric) tests for continuous variables between 2 and more independent groups. RESULTS: A total of 113 GO trainees from 29 countries responded. The mean (standard deviation) age was 35.2 (6.1) years, 59.3% were men, 40.7% were women, and 46% were in accredited training posts. The ALS and RS training was offered in only 43% and 23% of institutes respectively, and 54% and 23% of trainees had undergone some form of formal or informal training in ALS and RS respectively. A total of 62.4% felt that RS should be a formal component of GO training programs. A total of 61% and 35% planned to go outside their institute for ALS or RS training respectively. Trainees rating (1-5 scale) of their open surgery and ALS or RS skills (3.3/2.6/1.9) and training experience (3.5/2.8/2.1), respectively, were higher for open surgery than ALS or RS (P < 0.0005). Accredited posts were more likely than nonaccredited posts to offer ALS training (60%/31%, P = 0.002), formal training schedules (27.9%/4.4%, P = 0.003), and use of logbooks (46%/23%, P = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: Training and experience in ALS and RS are poorly rated by GO trainees across Europe, and only few centers offer this. There is an urgent need to expand and harmonize training opportunities for ALS and RS. Most trainees want RS included as a formal component of their training.

• MeSH
• Surgical Oncology education   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Gynecologic Surgical Procedures education   MeSH
• Laparoscopy education   MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Prospective Studies MeSH
• Robotic Surgical Procedures education   MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH